Not even close. Giving it a new name doesn't magically fix the problem. Join the real world, no matter what name you give something, it's still the same thing.

If I really wanted to seek some sort of discrepancy in the way its being named I'd argue youre changing the name so you can one day defend yourself by calling your noncey stash "legitimate" and therefore it is abuse material.

All in all, who gives a fuck what name its got. It's pure, unadulterated idiocy to think abused children are hurting because of the fact us non-abusers call it child porn and not sexual abuse material.

[–] madejackson@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Well I didn't say it fixes the problem. I'm just saying you're ignoring it. By ignoring the issue, you're empowering the issue. Which is definitely worse than not doing anything. So your opinion is wrong and ill-educated.

[–] Afghaniscran@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Exactly what issue is being ignored by not changing an already established name for something thats already widely agreed to be vile and disgusting?

[–] madejackson@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Are you serious? Instead of doubling down on your ignorancy by asking rhetorical questions you could also try to inform yourself. The answer to your question is in OP's post:

The children in these photos/videos can’t make pornography, they’re sexually abused into making this material. CP insinuates that it’s legitimate porn with children. CSAM, on the other hand, calls it what it is: sexual abuse of children.

load more comments (3 replies)